Electoral Reform Committee on Aug. 30th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Cullen, we're at six and a half minutes. I let it go because it was really fascinating—

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Sure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

—and I thought it was very enlightening for the committee and its report, but we'll go to Mr. Rayes now, please.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Dufresne, I have another question for you.

You visit New Zealand regularly. You have said that many people from various organizations in your circle are calling for proportional representation. What you forgot to say, however, is that New Zealand did in fact hold a referendum first to legitimize the process and the change in the voting system that was implemented.

Do we agree on that?

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

Absolutely.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

You said earlier that we should test out a voting system and then, I assume, ask citizens for their opinion after two or three elections. Is that what you are proposing?

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

It is a combination of various elements, but yes, that is partly what I am proposing.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

In short, your proposal to the committee is to hold a referendum after two elections to ask the people if they want to keep the new voting method or return to the current system, a first past the post system.

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

Yes, exactly.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Why should the committee study the voting method you are proposing any further? We have heard solid arguments from experts who have given us references and examples. They have stated that no voting system is perfect. Should we try out a new system? Should we not instead get the public's go-ahead before we change the voting method?

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

You are perfectly right. Once again, we believe that the question must be put to the people.

As I said earlier, there is a combination of elements to be considered. I think we can agree on one thing. You seem to feel strongly about the public making an informed choice and that it should not be up to MPs only. That is a very important to us as well. It seems clear that we agree on that. We want to see what the best way of doing that would be.

In New Zealand, a certain approach was taken. In Japan, it was a different approach. Different approaches have been used in various places. As many people have said, the reality in Canada is different. In that case, why not have a different process?

In our opinion, the best way would be to fully involve citizens in the decision. We think that the idea of creating citizen juries could come out of the committee's work. Citizens could be chosen randomly to examine the committee's recommendations. This would provide some objective information.

People have often said that there could be different outcomes to a referendum.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

That's right, in favour of the people. In favour of the people.

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

It could depend on how the question is phrased. A citizen jury that evaluates the situation objectively...

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Can you give us an example of a country that changed its voting method based on a jury system? Can you name one?

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

We are looking for a Canadian way of doing things. In Canada, that could be a way of ensuring that the decision is not solely in the hands of MPs, which is a concern; the final decision should be up to voters, which is also your concern. We are looking for some kind of arbitration.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Is there any country in the world that has changed its voting method based on that kind of consultation system?

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

I don't know any place where that combination has been used.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

In short, you would like us to use that combination to change the fundamental aspect of our democracy instead of consulting the entire population. I would like to highlight the following from all the surveys that have been conducted.

You say your organization wants to conduct consultations in order to gather public input and foster civic participation. More than 60% of Quebec's population and more than 70% of Canada's population are in favour of a referendum on whether or not we should change our voting system.

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

We are in favour of that.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

If you really want to achieve your objectives, why don't you advocate for something that has been proven elsewhere instead of your approach to something that is so fundamental?

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

The real question is what do we have to fear. Are we afraid of letting citizens try it?

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Why are we afraid of trusting citizens after properly informing them and after the committee has completed its work? Why not give them the chance to express their views? We are not in California where there is a steady stream of referendums. To my knowledge, there have not been a lot of referendums in Canada. Why are we afraid of that? If you are confident that the system you have just proposed is sound, why are you afraid to ask citizens that question?

[Jean-Sébastien Dufresne]

They have to be asked the question under the best possible conditions. We are looking for the best way to proceed.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Yes, we should have the resources. Let us recommend that the committee give the government the resources to do the necessary outreach. Let the public decide after that. If one party believes in it, it will advocate for it as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

To end this round of questions, I will give the floor to Mr. DeCourcey.